comatose = deeply unconscious
_________________________________________________________________________________




[a]
A comatosed person is not aware that food is in front of them.

[b]
It is possible for a comatosed person to be physically capable of picking up food and eating it.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Some comatosed persons cease to be comatosed persons.
They sometimes change from a comatosed person to a conscious person.


There have been cases of the day arriving when they become aware that food is in front of them.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Is such a day possible in the case of Terri Schiavo ?

_________________________________________________________________________________


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Bart Goddard" wrote in message
news:130.01.22.05.492766000@srcbs.org...
>
>
> gkmcnees@comcast.net wrote:
>
> >>> I'm wondering whether you realize that "enabling" is a
> >> bad thing. You probably mean "empowering".
> >
> > I don't care too much about political correctness.
> > I used the term, "enable" because Calvinists always
> > use the term "unable."
> >
> > And Christ said that no one is able to come unless
> > God draws him.
>
> It's not about political correctness, but about what
> the word has come to mean. The meaning of a word
> is only related to its etymology, it's not the
> etymology itself. Just because "able" is the root
> word, doesn't mean that "enable" mean "en" "able".
>
> Enable and empower are almost the same word, but
> the first has very negative connotations, while the
> second has very positive ones.
>
>
>
> >>>We are saved when when we believe, "He that believeth on
> >>>the Son hath everlasting life:"
> >>
> >>
> >> I (and others) keep asking this question, and you don't
> >> answer it. Here, you make a claim, and then you cite
> >> a verse which doesn't say anything like what you claimed.
> >
> > Uh? To dense I guess.
>
> "Too". The verse says "he that believeth is saved".
> You say "We are saved when we believe"

Precisely! And I repeat it!

There are verses in which the logical ORDER of
faith and life are not clear. But there are numerous
ones which are clear! And in EVERY one of them
the order is LIFE THROUGH FAITH.

NEVER faith through life, as you and your
Calvinist co